The Lemon Fool

scotia wrote: ...hence we have no way of knowing whether or not their funds may be affected - apart from their statement saying that they won't be.

If, having read and considered them, your view is that the firm's statements are deliberately inaccurate then, surely, you should position accordingly. Similarly, if you consider the change of fund manager a future performance concern.

Otherwise, I would hope most readers would understand the point I sought to make.

If, having read and considered them, your view is that the firm's statements are deliberately inaccurate then, surely, you should position accordingly.

A statement may not be deliberately inaccurate, however it may deliberately fail to disclose relevant events - and that's what is concerning me (and others). Has something taken place - e.g. a regulatory violation - which could affect the future of their funds? We don't know.

scotia wrote: Has something taken place - e.g. a regulatory violation - which could affect the future of their funds? We don't know.

They have admitted they are under investigation along with a handful of other fund managers for alleged price collusion on the "On the Beach" IPO.

I don't know anything about this particular situation, but the immediate thought that has occurred to me is that only a fool gets caught first time. Once the FCA and SFO start digging this could get a lot bigger. If the funds have been damaged by illegal goings on I would expect the fund management firm to compensate fund holders. I once received very generous compensation from Deutsche over the Peter Young affair:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/ ... harge.html

If I held any of the funds under management, I would look into the resources of the fund management firm and whether it is likely they have the ability to pay what may be a hefty fine and compensation. In my case there was no problem as Morgan Grenfell were taken over by Deutshe Bank.

scotia wrote:...we have no way of knowing whether or not their funds may be affected - apart from their statement saying that they won't be.

BobGe wrote:If, having read and considered them, your view is that the firm's statements are deliberately inaccurate then, surely, you should position accordingly.

A statement may not be deliberately inaccurate, however it may deliberately fail to disclose relevant events

Splitting hairs?

scotia wrote:...and that's what is concerning me (and others). Has something taken place - e.g. a regulatory violation - which could affect the future of their funds? We don't know.

"...apart from their statement saying that they won't be."

Seems like you consider they are be being 'economical with the truth'.

Bobge - you asked if I was splitting hairs.
Let me be quite clear. I believe that the full reason for the sacking of their Fund Manager has not been fully disclosed, and consequently there is uncertainty whether or not this will affect future performance.
I quote from R&M's RNS of 7th February:-

The conduct issue was unrelated to his portfolio manager responsibilities and has not impacted the pricing or NAV of any RAMAM fund and no client or investor has been negatively affected in connection with this matter.

However the share price of the R&M UK Micro Cap IT has declined substantially. Clearly investors have been negatively affected.
I am puzzled why you think

A disparaging thread that would be better had it never existed, IMHO.